Preserve Article XII

“Land is one of the principal sources of social stability. It gives root to the pride, confidence and identity as a people that will permit cooperative action necessary to a successful Commonwealth. If the land passes out of the hands of the people of the Northern Mariana Islands, these unique social and economic benefits will be lost.”

The foregoing statement is an excerpt extracted from the analysis of the CNMI Constitution. I want to share my personal thoughts on this issue of Article XII amid recent plans seeking to do away with it in the name of economic prosperity. But before I proceed, I want to remind all readers (Article XII proponents and opponents alike) that the CNMI Constitution (including Article XII) was ratified by both the CNMI and federal governments. Thus, it is fair to say that questioning its legality based on the premise of “discrimination” may be immaterial. Recently, a local legislator suggested that in order for the CNMI’s economy to rebound, it must increase the constitutionally-mandated leasehold duration on both private and public lands. Worse, another local legislator proposed to scrap Article XII entirely for the same reasons. With all due respect to our elected leaders, this line of reasoning is extremely flawed.

Historically, the Commonwealth has enjoyed economic prosperity even with Article XII in place. The CNMI’s poor economic state is a result of internal and external forces. Internal in that the government itself is the largest organization in the Commonwealth. What this government pays for its personnel far exceeds any other established organization found in the CNMI’s private sector. Sadly, the organization continues to increase itself, while the service it provides continues to falter. Other internal factors include poor planning, deficit spending, blatant disregard of fiscal responsibilities (or abuses in government expenditures), unstable and/or inconsistent policies governing business, and most strikingly, the continued practice of floating bonds when the Commonwealth is already up to its neck in arrears. Committing the CNMI to assume more debts is certainly not the proper avenue of retiring the deficit. Realistically, passing a practical and reasonable budget consistent with the actual revenues being collected would be the sensible approach. Hence, the 100 percent reprogramming authority granted by this same august body to the administration is also a disappointment. With spending levels last pegged at $213M while actual revenue collections reportedly at $190 million, how does the government plan on avoiding deficit spending? In my view, this approach is no different from taking money from one pocket and placing it in another, both of which belong to the same pair of trousers.

Similarly, the external forces blamed for our present economic condition include SARS, our nation’s war against terrorism, JAL pullout, etc. Now, I want to ask our legislators the following: Will eliminating Article XII put an end to SARS, the war on terrorirsm, or return JAL to service the islands? If so, how? On a related note, we need to remind ourselves that NMI lineage is not restricted only to persons who are presently living and who are qualified pursuant to Section 4 of Article XII of the CNMI Constitution OR, those deemed as qualified NMI descents by the MPLA’s NMI Descent Registry; unless of course, the entire NMI descent population would cease to exist in the present day due to unforeseen or catastrophic events.

My point here is simple: Who are we (those who are now living) to decide this issue for subsequent generations, namely those who have yet to be born? I for one would not want to be held responsible for the displacement of countless future generations as a result of hasty decisions rendered by our elected leaders. Passing this initiative at this juncture will adversely affect the socioeconomic state of the CNMI. For instance, with the ever-increasing unemployment rate, compounded with the CNMI’s poor economic state, it is unquestionable that properties will be sold below fair market values. It will be a buyers’ market, so to speak! In a five- to 10-year span, there will be no more land left to lease or sell. And then what? Reactivate Article XII? The Marianas archipelago is significantly diminutive when compared to other countries, including Third World nations. Our land is all we have left—our identity! I am appalled that some legislators are more concerned about losing uninhabited land to potential investors (for economic prosperity) than they are losing our identity and land on islands that are currently inhabited.

To this end, I want to remind our elected leaders that we are only borrowers of our children’s lands; those with us and others who will be joining us in the generations to come. Aptly, I believe that the responsible thing to do is to afford Generation X (post-Baby Boomers: Those born in the ’60s and ’70s) the opportunity to decide the fate of Article XII in the year 2011. If they want this article eliminated, so be it. If not, let us respect their wishes and finally put this issue to rest!

Kimo Mafnas Rosario
Koblerville, Saipan